Okay, here's the thing: Lorenzo LOVES these pictures. Tom is underwhelmed. We're both in agreement that this is another example of the trend in fashion editorials lately to feature women's clothing with naked men. This time, they left out the women completely - and to be fair, it's mostly takes on fetish gear. There are only a few pieces that could count as women's wear.

And while Tom is always up for a naked man, he thinks these pictures, from concept to staging to styling, are all kinda bleh. Notable only because it's another in a line of editorials featuring semi-dressed to undressed men.

Utter crap. This is Vogue Hommes, so I don't really understand them having a bunch of fetish clad men in it. I'm a straight guy who reads Vogue Men, and out of the other guys I know who read it as well, they're all straight too. I don't have problem with male nudity in art in the magazines, that's not what I'm getting at. This isn't art though. This is just 'pushing the envelope'. It's not even well conceived or shot. A bunch of naked men in weird torture devices. No fashion whatsoever.

TLo, when you've sprung naked men on us before, it was done in a tasteful, campy humor and it related to fashion. This paraphrenalia doesn't relate to fashion and it glorifies sex-based torture. Prefer not to see any more, thanks.

While I do agree that some of it is eerie, I find that the photos elicit a lot of symbolism. It's interesting to see that they're putting men in this BDSM/fetish wear that is woman's clothing. The poses, the outfits, a lot of them scream submission which, in history and society isn't the role that males generally play. There's a bit of what I see as humiliation, especially in the picture where the man is sitting with his back to the camera. It's very dark and creepy but I love how clearly the message is portrayed.

reminds me of the photo shoot of Bruce Willis & his gf (in W? I can't remember). Not artistically provocative; there's a certain laziness in relying on the fact that the models are in fetishwear as being the driving factor to render a shoot provocative / interesting.

It is illegal in Japan to show genitalia (or, more specifically, pubic hair). All their porn is censored with mosaics. Without the red rectangles, this magazine would be pulled and the publisher fined.

And honestly, while Japanese people largely do appreciate "Eurocentric beauty", the vast majority of their fashion magazines feature ethnic Japanese people. This is just a shoot done by non-Japanese people for a non-Japanese magazine. If anything, if T&L care about ethnodiversity (that's an if, they never claimed this blog was about that), they should cover non-European fashion magazines. They exist!

I don't know about the other pictures but I am in LOVE with the picture with the man in the hood not facing the camera. I LOVE the line of his neck.... it's just so graceful underneath such an ugly hood.

I don't find these pictures creepy, but they are boring. Nobody looking at any of these pictures would think that any of the models is either frightened or excited. Perhaps that makes the objectification more complete, but it's tedious.

And I laughed out loud at the skeletons--they look so much like long-dead twin babies in a front carrier. As if the guy couldn't figure out the combination of how to get the thing off or the kids out, so they had to just die and stay right there.

Creepy as hell. I'm not even all that interested in what's behind the rectangles, the S&M crap turns me off so much.

Middle West said: "What with Abu Gharib, waterboarding and all, these photos are just beyond the pale for me. Torture shouldn't be a trend that anyone should be highlighting right now.

I understand the differentiation between BDSM/fetish and torture but I'm with MidWest on this one. Creepy and trying too hard for provocative, as others have noted. Waste of models and pages in Vogue Hommes.

i'm kind of surprised so many people are "creeped out" by this. what if these were female models? there are bdsm/fetish shoots all the time, but throw in some masculinity and suddenly it's abu gharib? sorry if i'm getting over-analytical (i'm in a grouchy mood) but i'm surprised that male.. vulnerability i guess? elicits such a negative reaction. there's a very big difference between fetish and torture.

that said i only really like two of the shots - the first one with the awesome bone arm cuff things, and the one mentioned with just the back of the neck. i think that's one of the most beautiful parts of the male body.

Anonymous said... It is illegal in Japan to show genitalia (or, more specifically, pubic hair). All their porn is censored with mosaics. Without the red rectangles, this magazine would be pulled and the publisher fined.

Why not? I disagree with you. These pictures have been discussed in every fashion forum and site out there. It's not like Tlo uploaded Playgirl photos, this is from Vogue magazine. If nothing else, it's a great topic to be discussed.

Bondage and S&M styling doesn't get me excited, whether it's male or female. And there's no fashion at all. Overall, I'm underwhelmed, so count me on Tom's team for this one.

Anonymous 2:05, I noticed it before looking at the photos I was bothered. Once I saw that it wasn't a fashion shott, I backed off. Maybe I'm not political enough to have it bother me at a higher level.

"Then many of the women here would be highly offended at the "woman as sexual slave" imagery."

no you're right, i think a lot of us (me included) would find that offensive, re: rihanna's recent shoot for italian vogue...

i'm finding it difficult to pin-point what i'm trying to say, i appologize... i guess that since most people are much less used to seeing men in a submissive role, it's more difficult to see any beauty in the photos, because the knee-jerk reaction is "unnatural! torture! scary!" granted, this is a bit more "hardcore" than most fetishy shoots i've seen, so maybe it is a bit of an exception.

Admittedly I've never really been a fan of fetish themed things. If you translate it into fashion that's a different story, but when it is straight fetish just to "push the envelope" and "be provocative" I just wish they would think a little harder next time. Almost too cliche to me I guess. Some interesting poses and ideas but over all MEH on the fashion side. And come on people with the torture complaints! There is fetish and there is torture and I agree with other posters that are saying you may not be feeling the same way if it were women models.

Also, did they really just slap on rectangles in the magazine? No likey.

After an initial look at a spread, I usually go back again and again to study it. I will not be returning to this one. The last thing I need nowadays is to look at something dark and forboding. I can look at my bank account and 401K to see that!!!I probably will have nightmares tonight.

The subtitle is "Kamen no Kokuhaku", the original title of Yukio Mishima's literary masterpiece translated as Confessions of a Mask.

The text (as much of it as I can read with the scan quality) reads roughly: "Men adorned to look like offerings to the gods. There is nothing more beautiful than covering the face with a mask to transform a body into an object. Ultimate beauty straddles the line between living and dead."

It's an interesting shoot, to me, but I agree that I'm not really seeing the fashion in it, unless it's purely meant to try to guide a trend.

Anonymous 9/9/09 2:05 PM Anyone not bothered by the fact that none of these men are of Japanese descent. This photoshoot is not only not fashion, but it's also implanting Eurocentric standards of beauty.

Vogue China's Scientific glamour did the same thing and it really needs to stop. Stuff like this is what is leading many Asian women to get eyelid surgery.===========This adds to my theory that all issues of Vogue are produced in a small warehouse in Hoboken, NJ. They spin a roulette wheel to determine the theme and draw slips of paper for the country.

Anonymous 9/9/09 2:05 PM Anyone not bothered by the fact that none of these men are of Japanese descent. This photoshoot is not only not fashion, but it's also implanting Eurocentric standards of beauty.

Vogue China's Scientific glamour did the same thing and it really needs to stop. Stuff like this is what is leading many Asian women to get eyelid surgery.===========This adds to my theory that all issues of Vogue are produced in a small warehouse in Hoboken, NJ. They spin a roulette wheel to determine the theme and draw slips of paper for the country.

Utter crap. This is Vogue Hommes, so I don't really understand them having a bunch of fetish clad men in it. I'm a straight guy who reads Vogue Men, and out of the other guys I know who read it as well, they're all straight too. I don't have problem with male nudity in art in the magazines, that's not what I'm getting at. This isn't art though. This is just 'pushing the envelope'. It's not even well conceived or shot. A bunch of naked men in weird torture devices. No fashion whatsoever.

While I am not going to question your orientation, I do have to wonder why this is such a big deal to you. Nude men (not pornography) don't belong in a men's fashion magazine? There are tons upon tons of nude women in other fashion magazines, and I don't cry out "My eyes! My eyes!" when I see them. while I won't dispute the sexuality in these photos, I find it so terribly myopic to be offended by the nude male body and criticizing its presence in a magazine.

For me, it just feels like the S&M theme is taken in such a straightforward manner that it doesn't pop here. It just looks generic, which is kind of strange to say, but they really don't interest me very much. I'm more likely to go back and look at the photos from the Vogue Italia "Dream of a Dress" spread because they do seem to tap into something deeper.

NYCourier, you've misstated Marshall's comment. He clearly said he had no problem with the nudity, just with the fetish gear. I think that's pretty much what a lot of the people who are uncomfortable with this post are saying.

I'm generally a pretty cool old bag, but I'm sure I blushed all the way up to the roots of my hair when I saw this particular post.

Plus, as a mom, there's always the unsettling worry about how your young daughters who are fanatic Project Runway fans and routinely visit this site because they love TLo's hilarity would react if they were to stumble upon these pictures. That thought brings out a knee-jerk hormone-fueled horrified reaction in me. Gotta think that I'm not alone in being unsettled and deeply uneasy by this post due to that always present protective Mom feeling.

I'd bet it is a contributing factor to some of the creeped out reactions these photos are eliciting, just that nobody is articulating it.

Agree with srq and Marshall. NyCourrier - I am a straight woman and actually like the body shots and no problem with the nudity - it is the darkness or styling or fetish or WTH that crap is that I don't like.

And to Thomas and the others who equate "torture/Abu Ghraib"; sorry, but most of what they did there was about humilitation not "torture" (pulling out fingernails, breaking knees, freezing, etc.)

...Although what constitutes "torture" is somewhat subjective.

*I* know people who've experienced these things, here, in the states - both the huiliation and the things called torture. So alluding to it on film for someone's "pleasure" is not that I really find entertaining.

BlackRaspberry said..."I *adore* the second picture with the floral hat."

Me, too, BlackRaspberry! For me, it was also one of the most compelling shots in the spread (cheap pun intended). I guess I like the contrast (it also reminded me of one of my favorite photographers Susan Fenton). The others seemed a bit self-conscious or like they're trying too hard. Some made me titter --- not out of embarrassment, but because they looked downright silly. Nevertheless, I was neither offended, nor creeped out by this group. Nice photography though.

"The text (as much of it as I can read with the scan quality) reads roughly: "Men adorned to look like offerings to the gods. There is nothing more beautiful than covering the face with a mask to transform a body into an object. Ultimate beauty straddles the line between living and dead."

It pushes it into a further (more valid) conceptual realm. Now you've piqued my interest about Mishima.

Before anything else, I have to say that I'm not really into anything too fetishist or S&M. The occasional allusion in fashion or design and photography can be interesting, amusing, even erotic, but only as long as it remains an inspirational detail, not the literal thing. I can appreciate that there are quite diverse opinions on this matter - sociologically or artistically - and there might be really good work based on torture and BDSM, it's just not my cup of tea. Although I like eye-candy just as much as everybody else and I understand female eye-candy as much a male, I don't like either sex in any form of submission - I find it degrading and creepy.

Now to the photographs: I don't quite get it. These are in the Japanese Vogue for men, right? Why do they put men in bondage into a men's magazine? I know, Japan has a wide market that's inclined to that kind of stuff, but I'm astounded that Vogue caters this market...I never thought of bondage-instruments as fashion. As some other posters have already said, it's an interesting concept to put men in bondage-wear intended for women and I even think it's a great and potentially provocative idea for a photo spread. It being bound to the novel "Confessions of a Mask" and the undertone of offerings to the gods is interesting and I'd like to see what a different photogrpher would have made of it. Steven klein'S take on it just didn't work out well. I think only few of the shots were artistically well done apart from the cover, which would be the first with the steps (and I still think they could have found a solution to do this pose without need for the red square. Get creative, for Christ's sake! You are creating art!), the one with the ladies' hat and the very last one. Some of the others have the typical stiff, awkward and unnatural posing that's a -to me irritating -constant in Steven Klein's work, some might be good but nonetheless freak me out in their artlessness. Still, the back-shots and the one with the candle are alright, but why shoot poses where you need to cover them with a square? Did they want to make it look like a cheap porno-rag?It could have been an interesting, even disturbing shoot; they had a provocative theme, the creepy accessories, and nice models although i think it would be more interesting with Japanese models. What these photos lack is a story and a heart. They convey strange contraptions and bad posíng instead of emotions. Good photography might have made this an unsettling and moving story. It remained something where we discuss why the red squares are where they are...

Anon 4:41: Some people like missionary, others like being tied up. Different strokes for different folks. I was OBJECTING to the fact that this photoshoot was compared to Abu Ghraib (which was a ridiculous comparison - this is fashion, not torture. Jeez).

I don't think this photoshoot should be compared to Abu Ghraib because it's about sex and pleasure, not about subjecting people to pain and humiliation. BIG difference. I really don't think this photoshoot has any relevance to fashion though.

I dunno. At first I was confused. I get easily confused by editorials because so many times they take a gorgeous dress and after all the styling and lights and smoke and mirrors, all you get to see is a button. I don't get it.

But since no one got the "fashion" in this editorial I went back to look at the photography. Mapplethorpe light indeed. The translation of the text makes it sounds even more tame and lame than it is.

I am not into the fetish scene or fashion, but I am a huge fan of Mapplethorpe and did so much more, with a much better understanding of light and shape, that this just seems desperate. It's like Kim's black dress. It screams looks at me I am SO cutting edge and SO controversial, when in reality you are only meh.

I have no problem with Japan using European/American models. We are the exotic look for Asia. There is an ice cream store in China Town in NY where regular flavors list such items as green tea ice cream while the exotic list has strawberry. European fashion designers always often go for exotic looks be it African or Asian. Asian designers look to the west for something the looks different.

Thank you for translating on the fly, tehkou! I can totally see the theme and it's a very interesting take and elevated my appreciation.

I had no idea the guys in the Vogue home office in Hoboken read Mishima. Props to them for that. But jeers to them for thinking the gods would only want a sacrifce from their go-to New York modeling agency.

It remained something where we discuss why the red squares are where they are...

I'm not sure if these red squares were present in the original or not, but honestly it wouldn't surprise me either way; Japan has some really weird and arbitrary censorship laws. I won't get into it here due to probable TMI, but it's something worth googling around about it if you're interested.

@memorexe

It pushes it into a further (more valid) conceptual realm. Now you've piqued my interest about Mishima.

I'm glad! Mishima is a pretty fascinating (and often disturbing) guy, and a majorly influential figure in Japanese literature.

Actually now I'm wondering if any of this shoot was meant to specifically reference The Martyrdom of Saint Sebastian, which is presented in Mask as the protagonist's first erotic fixation...

@suzq

Thanks for the support. Gotta make use of that Japanese BA somehow. :)

MouseAnony said...Plus, as a mom, there's always the unsettling worry about how your young daughters who are fanatic Project Runway fans and routinely visit this site because they love TLo's hilarity would react if they were to stumble upon these pictures. That thought brings out a knee-jerk hormone-fueled horrified reaction in me.

That's why the post has a "NSFW" warning and it's clearly indicated that the post is about Vogue, not Project Runway, thus, you click at your own risk.

The subtitle is "Kamen no Kokuhaku", the original title of Yukio Mishima's literary masterpiece translated as Confessions of a Mask.

The text (as much of it as I can read with the scan quality) reads roughly: "Men adorned to look like offerings to the gods. There is nothing more beautiful than covering the face with a mask to transform a body into an object. Ultimate beauty straddles the line between living and dead."

It's an interesting shoot, to me, but I agree that I'm not really seeing the fashion in it, unless it's purely meant to try to guide a trend.

Thank you so much for translating it. It add a new layer to this already controversial topic.

I'm amazed at how many people have come out and pronounced this "not fashion". Wasn't there another editorial just this week or last where everyone was saying, "It's not about fashion; it's about a point of view"?

I'm loving reading the comments. It's interesting to see how differently people react to a still image. I remember reading an interview with Anna Wintour saying (or was it in the movie The Devil Wears Prada? I can't remember) that the fashion magazine industry is about selling a dream; you don't necessarily sell the dress, you sell the image of the girl in the dress.

The subtitle is "Kamen no Kokuhaku", the original title of Yukio Mishima's literary masterpiece translated as Confessions of a Mask.

The text (as much of it as I can read with the scan quality) reads roughly: "Men adorned to look like offerings to the gods. There is nothing more beautiful than covering the face with a mask to transform a body into an object. Ultimate beauty straddles the line between living and dead."

DonMelhus said...MouseAnony said...Plus, as a mom, there's always the unsettling worry about how your young daughters who are fanatic Project Runway fans and routinely visit this site because they love TLo's hilarity would react if they were to stumble upon these pictures. That thought brings out a knee-jerk hormone-fueled horrified reaction in me.

That's why the post has a "NSFW" warning and it's clearly indicated that the post is about Vogue, not Project Runway, thus, you click at your own risk.

9/9/09 5:37 PM

WHAT? What teenagers do you know who would let a little thing like THAT stop them?

Seriously.

One other thing. Teen boys might have two gigabytes of porn on their hard drives, and thus none of this might be all that shocking or offensive to them. BUT, fashion-obsessed teenage girls know of Vogue as a fancy women's fashion magazine. They (and their Moms!) also might expect a post regarding Vogue to be of a similar vein as the rest of this web site, not a sudden dump into the dark side. Plus, not everybody knows that "Hommes" means men. (I didn't. Yikes! If a video camera had been rolling, the expression on my face as I realized what this post was about would have been played at family reunions to choruses of guffaws for the rest of my life.)

DonMelhus said... MouseAnony said... Plus, as a mom, there's always the unsettling worry about how your young daughters who are fanatic Project Runway fans and routinely visit this site because they love TLo's hilarity would react if they were to stumble upon these pictures. That thought brings out a knee-jerk hormone-fueled horrified reaction in me.

That's why the post has a "NSFW" warning and it's clearly indicated that the post is about Vogue, not Project Runway, thus, you click at your own risk.

9/9/09 5:37 PM

WHAT? What teenagers do you know who would let a little thing like THAT stop them?

Seriously.

One other thing. Teen boys might have two gigabytes of porn on their hard drives, and thus none of this might be all that shocking or offensive to them. BUT, fashion-obsessed teenage girls know of Vogue as a fancy women's fashion magazine. They (and their Moms!) also might expect a post regarding Vogue to be of a similar vein as the rest of this web site, not a sudden dump into the dark side. Plus, not everybody knows that "Hommes" means men. (I didn't. Yikes! If a video camera had been rolling, the expression on my face as I realized what this post was about would have been played at family reunions to choruses of guffaws for the rest of my life.)

You're missing my very basic point. They're YOUR children, not Tlo's. YOU need to keep them away from the computer or this site NOT Tlo.

Well, from the responses on this page I would say it is definitely art. I have always felt that art was supposed to create strong feelings an audience and I would say that there are certainly some strong feelings here. I'm not surprised this is out of Japan though, even though they have strict laws this is also the company that gave us The Fisherman's Wife. Japanese erotic images is always "Interesting"

I would disagree about BDSM and fetishism not inspiring fashion - I think that defintely can, and often does.

On a personal note, this neither offend me, creeped me out, or inspired me - mostly I just thought, "why would you take a perfectly good naked boy and do that?"

Big thanks to TLO for posting and letting me read some interesting conversation.

I liked #s 2, 8, 9, and 12. I found the rest to be generally underwhelming, especially the two with the window frame or whatever it is. Such unispired poses. (Though that helmet in the second to last picture is interesting.) I echo the sentiment about hating the red rectangles. If you're gonna go there, then go there! I do really wish I had those boots in the last picture.

The subject matter doesn't bother me in the least, and I really hope that TLo never censor what they want to talk about based on whether young people might be reading (or looking at) it. I'll pay them not to, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Is it the most imaginative fetish wear? No, but it's still interesting. People dressing up as horses is actually a fairly popular thing (google "ponygirl" or "ponyboy," if you dare) but most of it is variations on bondage. I just kinda wish that they had managed to integrate clothing into it more, because otherwise it seems kind of out of place in Vogue.

Don Melhus said:You're missing my very basic point. They're YOUR children, not Tlo's. YOU need to keep them away from the computer or this site NOT Tlo.

9/9/09 6:22 PM

And you're missing my very basic point. Any kid given a computer and the freedom to surf the web is going to read this site if they follow Project Runway, particularly because of the link right back to here on the TLo Awards page of the "family-friendly" Mylifetime.com.

I'm getting the distinct impression that either you don't have kids or you REALLY don't know what freedom they require. One can't be a helicopter parent forever and must know when to start trusting their instincts. But their instincts about trusting certain web sites can be proven wrong.

And until today, it would never, ever have occurred to me or any other Mom that this was a site that anybody might want to protect their kids from.

Y'know, we expected this post to get some negative reactions but some of this surprised even us.

"Family friendly?" Who on earth ever mistook this site for a "family friendly" one? The language we use alone would disqualify us from that description.

And if the language doesn't disqualify is then the various other posts over the years where we've shown semi-naked models, both male and female certainly would have. And that's the thing: we're talking SEMI-NAKED here, or naked with the offending parts blocked out. From some of the reactions, you would have thought we posted hardcore porn.

We chose the current layout because we want to showcase a range of items and topics. We label posts like this as "NSFW," which is the standard disclaimer used on the internet when something might not be acceptable to all eyes. We've made it very easy for our readers to skip over any posts that they don't like.

We realize that posts like this aren't acceptable to everyone, but there's nothing forcing anyone to read them. As far as "what about the children" type arguments, sorry, but that has never been our concern with this blog and it won't ever be a concern of ours in the future.

The bottom line here is that this woman (on behalf of all the women out there) wants to a) control what is posted here b) that TLO keep in mind all teh children that might be reading this site when they decide what is to be posted here.

First and most importantly - it is NOT TLo's job to edit the site because kids who like fashion and PR might come here.

I don't always agree with MouseAnony - in fact I don't totally agree now.But I do somewhat understand her comments. Partially based on her first post (and other posts like it).

To me partial (or full) nudity wouldn't be the issue. It is more the full image of the ...spread.

I remember as a kid and young teen seeing Playboy (no biggie),and then a Hustler (which totally grossed us out). When my friends and I were a little older we were at the house of a friend, who's parents were never home, and her brother showed us some serious porn. It's not like it scarred us at all, but I know our parents most certainly wouldn't want to have us exposed to that when we were pretty young.

First and most importantly - it is NOT TLo's job to edit the site because kids who like fashion and PR might come here.

I don't always agree with MouseAnony - in fact I don't totally agree now. But I do somewhat understand her comments. Partially based on her first post (and other posts like it).

To me partial (or full) nudity wouldn't be the issue. It is more the full image of the ...spread.

I remember as a kid and young teen seeing Playboy (no biggie),and then a Hustler (which totally grossed us out). When my friends and I were a little older we were at the house of a friend, who's parents were never home, and her brother showed us some serious porn. It's not like it scarred us at all, but I know our parents most certainly wouldn't want to have us exposed to that when we were pretty young.

But we looked, it wasn't for us, and that was that.

Exactly! Amen, sister! It's not for you, you move on, read the next post.

Well, from the responses on this page I would say it is definitely art. I have always felt that art was supposed to create strong feelings an audience and I would say that there are certainly some strong feelings here. I'm not surprised this is out of Japan though, even though they have strict laws this is also the company that gave us The Fisherman's Wife. Japanese erotic images is always "Interesting"

I would disagree about BDSM and fetishism not inspiring fashion - I think that defintely can, and often does.

On a personal note, this neither offend me, creeped me out, or inspired me - mostly I just thought, "why would you take a perfectly good naked boy and do that?"

Big thanks to TLO for posting and letting me read some interesting conversation.

Best comment I read here today and this is why I keep read them otherwise I would only read your posts, Tlo!

Teen boys might have two gigabytes of porn on their hard drives, and thus none of this might be all that shocking or offensive to them. BUT, fashion-obsessed teenage girls know of Vogue as a fancy women's fashion magazine.

Yeah, and those girls probably have a bunch of NC-17 rated fanfiction and Yaoi manga on their harddrives. Teenagers, fashion obsessed or no, are never as innocent as their moms would like to believe.

And honestly, while Japanese people largely do appreciate "Eurocentric beauty", the vast majority of their fashion magazines feature ethnic Japanese people. This is just a shoot done by non-Japanese people for a non-Japanese magazine. If anything, if T&L care about ethnodiversity (that's an if, they never claimed this blog was about that), they should cover non-European fashion magazines. They exist!

Exactly. I've looked through quite some Japanese magazines (that don't have European counterparts) and almost always they will use Japanese models.

Plus, as a mom, there's always the unsettling worry about how your young daughters who are fanatic Project Runway fans and routinely visit this site because they love TLo's hilarity would react if they were to stumble upon these pictures. That thought brings out a knee-jerk hormone-fueled horrified reaction in me. Gotta think that I'm not alone in being unsettled and deeply uneasy by this post due to that always present protective Mom feeling.

As TLo have said, their blog has never been said to be "family friendly", would you honestly allow your children to view such a blog because of the language alone? If you would allow them so, then I think it's perfectly acceptable for them to view such a photoshoot as simply an editorial photoshoot. Given the fact that it's been published in a widely-accessible magazine (Vogue Homme Japan) and also given the fact that children nowadays are exposed to so much via the internet and through their friends, I don't think that they would find this shocking at all.

"Middle West said: What with Abu Gharib, waterboarding and all, these photos are just beyond the pale for me."

Yeah, and lets cancel the SI Swim Suit issue too. Afterall, swim suits = water = waterboarding. Not to mention that most of those pastel swimsuits would look like bondage gear if they were black instead.

Teen boys might have two gigabytes of porn on their hard drives, and thus none of this might be all that shocking or offensive to them. BUT, fashion-obsessed teenage girls know of Vogue as a fancy women's fashion magazine.

Oh heavens, like teenage girls are devoid of sexuality. There are some pictures in this editorial I would've eaten up as a teen. If they're old enough for their parents to give them free reign on the internet, these pictures should be of little surprise/consequence.

I see the artistic merit in these editorials, but like TLo's said about previous nudie-men editorials, I speculate some folks just living out fantasies. But at least it makes for pretty pictures.

Interesting to think of the pictures in light of Tehkou's translation (thanks, Tehkou). . . yet even then I find them unsophisticated and not even vaguely erotic. Like an anonymous said, "It screams looks at me I am SO cutting edge and SO controversial, when in reality you are only meh."

Miss Quoted, the only thing is that even if it's true that art should evoke strong feelings, it doesn't follow that everything that evokes strong feelings is art. I didn't look at this and find it particularly artistic because the ideas seem stale -- only clever at best (though I can appreciate that statement I suppose was made by the gender switch) -- and the pictures themselves seem devoid of feeling. But it's all subjective, isn't it?

"Mousanony said: Teen boys might have two gigabytes of porn on their hard drives, and thus none of this might be all that shocking or offensive to them. BUT, fashion-obsessed teenage girls know of Vogue as a fancy women's fashion magazine."

HA! You only WISH your teen daughter would be shocked.

The entire internet cannot be sanitized because some people are too lazy to supervise their own children, nor should it be.

Oh for the sake of fuck! If your kids happen to see it just tell them it's a goddamn halloween costume or that when you've been having sex with the same person for 15 years sometimes you have to shake it up a little. Okay?

DonMelhus said...MouseAnony said...And until today, it would never, ever have occurred to me or any other Mom that this was a site that anybody might want to protect their kids from.

Because they posted a FASHION spread from VOGUE of semi-naked men? Lady, have some perspective.

9/9/09 6:48 PM

No, because they posted a fashion spread from Vogue of semi-naked men in fetish gear that had precious little to nothing to do with fashion.

Follow along, Don. My posts today have not been discussing nekkid men (which don't bother me in the least) or language, just the graphic fetish gear.

And, kids weren't the only concern here. Certainly not mine - one is grown and the other three are dead (but the "Mom gene" persists). I'm just personally quite conservative and I'm not even a Republican. Sue me.

And to the Anon who persists in portraying me as aggrandizing myself by speaking for everybody else: I write a minimum of two thousand words a day at work and for my publications, and every last bit of THAT is required to be in the "royal we" -- a hard core thirty-year ingrained habit. When I am pooped, I sometimes lapse back into it unconsciously. Clearly I speak only for myself and I especially don't speak for YOU.

My, my, my. Late to the party, if that's what it is! I'm guessing every point imaginable has been made, so just a question.

Do nearly-nude photos of women in (what seems to me to be) pretty mild depictions of/references to fetish-wear draw this much concern?

Beyond that, neither fetish gear nor hairless, buff men do much for me except in a kind of theoretical way. (gee, honey, are those ab shadows just lighting or is there body paint involved?) So I kind of miss the designer clothes.

While I am not going to question your orientation, I do have to wonder why this is such a big deal to you. Nude men (not pornography) don't belong in a men's fashion magazine? There are tons upon tons of nude women in other fashion magazines, and I don't cry out "My eyes! My eyes!" when I see them. while I won't dispute the sexuality in these photos, I find it so terribly myopic to be offended by the nude male body and criticizing its presence in a magazine.

I think you misunderstood what I meant. I have absolutely no issue with the nude body, male or female, in a fashion magazine. It's a beautifully complex thing, and should be appreciated, but in a tasteful, relevant way. Had this shoot shown off incredible pieces of clothing along side the nudity, I would have had no problem with it. Had it been meant to draw attention to, or to address a social issue, I would have understood completely. This didn't do either. Other than the one photo with the hat, which I actually really liked, none of this read 'fashion' to me. At the same time, my issue isn't entirely with the 'fetish' angle either. TLo recently posted images from the W Magazine shoot featuring Bruce and Emma Willis. The shoot featured nudity, both male and female, as well as fetish undertones, and it was beautiful. The difference, in my eyes, was that that shoot included a good amount of fashion and displayed beautiful clothes beautifully. My problem isn't that there are nude men in a men's magazine. My problem is that there are nude men in a men's fashion magazine with nothing remotely related to fashion.

"I don't let my 12 year old daughter watch PR. She doesn't need to see the sniping and meanness that crops up."

She's probably getting plenty of that in school and on the internet.

My issue with this is that it is "shocking". Maybe because it is Japanese Vogue, and in some ways their culture is more conservative, but it looks like it's just a bunch of pictures of something new and shocking to the masses. The Bruce and Emma Willis spread had a theme to it (to me, anyway).

If it is a reference to Mishima, well, good for them, but it is very tame. I don't see any reference to St. Sebastian (and I'm Catholic!), except for the first picture (sans arrows).

I remember several other fashion editorials posted on this site that have had bondage/fetish themes, both depicting women and men (the Willis spread). I don't remember the level of outrage about them that has been expressed today.

Anyway, I don't particularly care for it, though the translation did help me understand what they were going for.

The photo where you see only the back of the neck and head as well as the hat is incredible. Very striking. However, not because of the hat... Other than that, eeh. The rectangles are annoying... what's the point when you show the shadow of the guy's... thing... on his leg? I feel that if they were going to cover the goodies, they should have covered the shadow as well.

You go, TLo! People have been showing these pics for years, with women. Now that it's men, we're all offended? Really? Chill people, its a fashion editorial, not domestic policy. About time the shoe's on the other foot. It's not my taste, but the young men are sure nice-looking.

Twenty years ago the small college (and town) I was attending was FREAKED OUT by an exhibit of a fellow photography student with photos very similar to these. He almost got arrested til he convinced authorities that he wasn't torturing people and that this was ART. It still left a lot of people uneasy, including me, but most of his fellow students were very supportive of his right to take the pictures. And the interesting thing is that he was such a nice guy and a good friend. But he had a very bizarre vision compared to most of us. It was also at that time that many of us were discovering Robert Mapplethorpe. It was our version of avant-garde. (RM and my friend.)

I agree it's not "fashion" at all, but some of the pictures are interesting. I really, really like numbers 2 and 6. But I also agree that most of the others where just kind of blah. It's almost as if they were trying to be shocking, but didn't put in the energy or creativity to make it something different and special.

And while I don't want to stomp on someone else's artistic interpretation, to everyone who says these photographs have anything to do with Abu Ghraib/torture - come on. This is fetish wear. These kind of images were around long before five years ago and will be around long after.

@Tehkou: Thanks, I know about the strict and for the Western culture rather strange moral laws. It's one of the reasons why Japanese pop-culture can be so extreme, I think. You're right, it's an interesting thing to read about. What I wanted to say was that with or without understanding of Japanese law and culture, people here talk about the suitability or the sexuality of the shoot (which includes the red squares) - instead of the artistic side. It's the sexuality which makes people react instead of the psychology behind it, and I think that's a pity because the sujet would have lent itself to deeper discussions.

I just need to say that I am not in any way offended by this spread.For some, it is art, for me it is just too dark and foreboding. I don't need that in my life right now. For those who think this type of thing should not be posted, get real. Your kids probably see some really bad stuff at school and on the net.I'm happy that many enjoyed this layout and appreciated it. It isn't fashion to me, but it obviously is to some. TLo, thanks for giving everyone something different all the time.You are priceless!!!

Seems to me that Vogue Nippon is just as screwed up as Vogue America. When I buy I fashion magazine I want fashion...Harper's Bazaar, Vogue Italy, British Vogue...hell even American Elle September was better than this.

You hardly ever get a good idea of what the clothes are actually like in (women's) editorials anyway, it's artsyschmartsy stuff 90% of the time. So it is indeed great eye candy.And thanks for the tip of the light switch covers. I'm printing them on adhesive paper as we speak, for my son's bedroom. He'll appreciate the humor, as will his dad.btw the rectangles are prob the Japanese censor's, they're even bigger prudes than Americans.

MouseAnony, you're back pedaling furiously. If you're so concerned that children are going to see fetish wear, where was this concern when they posted the Sharon Stone and Bruce Willis editorials, both of which featured nudity and fetishwear?

You can't ask people to censor what they post for fear of who might read it. The ENTIRE WORLD can read a published blog. Trying to control that would be insane. It's up to readers (or their parents) to decide what they're going to look at.

As I teacher, I was really creeped out by the previous fashion shoot about naked male students with sex and rape fantasies with their teacher. But I noticed that the comments didn't reflect my concerns. I stayed silent. So I am rather amused to see the reaction to these photos as "creepy" and beyond. Why didn't that bother folks when it was students and teachers in rape scenarios (not all, but some)? Fantasy is fantasy is one way to look at it. However, fantasy does at times spill over into real life, sometimes forced on unwilling participants (rape). To me, that's enough to know that these images aren't fashion, just sexism and misanthropy under the guise of make-up and interesting lighting. But I wouldn't tell anyone they aren't allowed to look it they want to -- I would just wonder why anyone would want to post it. (FYI, I didn't look at all the photos once I realized what they were. I did skip down to see what the comment trend reflected.)

When we were their age, if we wanted any porn, we had to walk 5 miles to the porn shop, in the snow, uphill both ways, dodging pervs with raincoats and sticky shoes.

And we were happy to do it, dammit.

I expected to be shocked when I read "NSFW", but I wasn't. I don't know squat about b/s/m, so I thought it was interesting and even fun to look at. Love the shot with the ladies hat, and the one with the candle.

Not everything can be child-friendly. Furthermore, not everything should be. Is there nothing left that's just for adults?

Huh, what a lot of fuss. Over in Japan it probably didn't cause even a blink of an eye. Except perhaps from the orange bars, which I suspect were made so obvious as a small protest, a joke. Bondage is so prevalent in Japanese porn that the government insisting upon covering what we all know is there, in artistic photographs, is just silly. So this may have been a way of saying something about the situation.

Gheez people, stop complaining about it not being fashion. I say thank god it's not a very fashiony editorial. (although there are accessories, counts as well)

If Vogue does anything it's the very perfect and utterly boring cliche fashion editorials. This is a breath of fresh air.

And censorship?. puhleaze, it's not like there is anything sexual about the pictures.. It's artistic male nude and censored with cute little squares.. it's just a pair of shorts away from the tell-sell muscle commercials

I love how people try to attach something of substance to where there obviously is none. This is simply a photoshoot capitalizing on nothing more than shock value. An empty shell of contrivance. Nowadays photographers can shoot just about anything have have hoards of brainless zombies wax poetic.

When a photographer adds the element of sex and nudity, you can be rest assured there will always be those who will immediately say, "Omg, so significant," "OH SO DEEP!"

*Staring wide eyed at the crotches* "OMG I LOVE THE shadowing there, it's just so artistic."

And to the previous poster, you find nothing remotely sexual about a shoot with naked models named "Bondage" ? How utterly fascinating that the blood seems to be flowing straight out of the brain and down to the crotch.